PURPOSE AND NEED 1

BACKGROUND 1

RELATED NPS PLANNING DOCUMENTS 5

POTENTIAL ISSUES 6

DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

Table 1. Description of Alternatives 8

Alternative 1: No Action 12

Elements Common to All Action Alternatives 12

Alternative 2: Depot Expansion without Road Realignment 14

Alternative 3: Proposed Action – Depot Expansion and Road Realignment 17

Alternative 4: Depot Expansion and Use of Hotel Access Road 20

MITIGATION AND MONITORING 21

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER

EVALUATION 23

PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 24

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 25

IMPACTS OF THE ALTERNATIVES

Table 2. Impacts of Alternatives Matrix 29

Alternative 1: No Action 33

Alternative 2: Depot Expansion without Road Realignment 36

Alternative 3: Proposed Action – Depot Expansion and Road Realignment 39

Alternative 4: Depot Expansion and Use of Hotel Access Road 41

COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION 43

Figure 1: Denali Park and Preserve Entrance Area 2

Figure 2: No Action Alternative 13

Figure 3: Alternative 2 Site Design 14

Figure 4: Proposed Temporary Staging Area 15

Figure 5: Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Site Design 16

Figure 6: Alternative 4 Site Design 22

Figure 7: Area Map, Denali National Park and Preserve 26

Appendix A: Subsistence - Section 810(A) Of ANILCA Evaluation 44

Appendix B: Wetlands Statement of Findings 49

Appendix C: Section 404 Summary 58

Appendix D: Section 4(f) Requirements 59

Bibliography 67

The National Park Service (NPS) is considering improving the design of the current railroad depot, adjacent parking lots, and access roads in the Denali National Park and Preserve entrance area (Figure 1). The NPS is working with the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) to improve these facilities to alleviate the existing parking problems, traffic congestion, and safety hazards.

Specifically, the project is designed to: improve the layout of the railroad depot, parking lots, and access roads to decrease congestion; assure vehicular and pedestrian safety; provide visitor services in a park-oriented depot facility; and plan for increased railroad usage. The project, if approved, would be initiated in the year of 2000. The Federal Transit Authority (FTA) has provided funding to the ARRC for the proposed depot facility expansion. The NPS would provide the funding to realign the park entrance road.

More visitors are using the Alaska Railroad as their main form of transportation to the park. In 1995, a total of over 133,000 passengers used the railroad to arrive and/or depart Denali. By 1999, the number increased to 174,000 passengers. The train is currently operating at its maximum workable length of 19 rail cars. The ARRC has tentative plans to change the current train schedule between Anchorage and Fairbanks in the next few years. The tentative schedule would feature two southbound trains and two northbound trains per day. Currently, the ARRC has one southbound train and one northbound train daily. Under the new schedule, there would be one southbound and one northbound train serving the pull cars of Holland America and Princess Tours, and one southbound and one northbound train serving the independent travelers and tour contractors. Each "pull" train would have 12 to 13 cars; each ARRC train would have six or seven cars, with expansion to 10 cars in the next few years. Although the future planned schedule would solve some of the congestion problems in and around the depot area, it would not address all the issues related to the increasing use of the ARRC.

Figure 1

Photo 1. Current bus parking at the Alaska Railroad Depot.

On a typical summer day at Denali National Park and Preserve, during train arrival and departure times, the access road into the railroad depot area is congested, often causing traffic delays on the Denali Park Road. Courtesy and shuttle buses, tour vans, and private vehicles drop off and pick up railroad passengers and baggage. Pedestrians walking through the parking lot to nearby trails and the park hotel add to the congestion by often walking behind vehicles and creating safety hazards.

In addition to the traffic and safety issues, the depot area does not conform to NPS design standards. The existing depot is located adjacent to the railroad tracks, with no buffer area between the parking lot and the tracks, and very little vegetative screening between the parking lot and the Denali Park Road. To add to this, the depot does not provide adequate waiting areas for the 1,200 to 1,500 passengers that access the train twice per day, creating congested areas during train arrival and departure times.

The NPS views the railroad as an important mode of transportation to and from Denali National Park and Preserve. The train has historically been an efficient mass transit system linking Denali with Anchorage, Fairbanks, and the ports of Whittier and Seward. The railroad also accommodates major international package tour groups.

This is a project specific environmental impact analysis tiered to the approved 1997 Entrance Area and Road Corridor Development Concept Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (DCP/EIS) for Denali National Park and Preserve. The DCP/EIS identifies the need for expansion of the railroad depot, but does not evaluate alternative depot designs and land use.

Related components of the DCP/EIS include the creation of an environmental education and science center across from the railroad depot in the existing hotel area. Site planning for this facility has been initiated, and further wetlands compliance will be completed prior to construction.

In addition, this environmental assessment amends one component of the DCP/EIS. The decision to close the McKinley Park airstrip to provide for potential expansion of the railroad depot has been modified. Upon additional consultation and coordination with the public and the ARCC, and additional review by the park, using the park airstrip for the expansion of the depot facilities is not considered a reasonable option. The park airstrip serves as an important base for emergency medical landings and medical evacuations via helicopter. It also serves as an airstrip for general aviation. It will remain open for the foreseeable future for current types of use at existing levels.

The 1997 Denali Strategic Plan establishes a long-term goal to implement at least 50 percent of the highest priority development actions in the Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS by 2002. The railroad depot expansion project is considered one of the highest priority development actions.

Specific park management objectives related to the Alaska Railroad Depot improvement project include:

• Provide adequate facilities and infrastructure to serve park visitor needs;
• Provide public environmental education opportunities with facilities that are aesthetically pleasing and environmentally sustainable; and,
• Provide a comprehensive transportation system management program that coordinates with internal and external transportation systems.

This environmental assessment contains analysis of the alternatives and impacts that would occur within the existing railroad easement, and on the NPS-administered areas adjacent to the easement, due to the expansion of the Alaska Railroad Depot in Denali National Park and Preserve. The Federal Transit Administration is participating as a cooperating agency in the preparation of this environmental assessment. This environmental assessment has been prepared according to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, regulations of the Council of Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.9), and agency policies.

The NPS, ARRC, and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) interdisciplinary planning team have identified potential issues relating to environmental impacts that the proposed development may present.

Vegetation: Vegetation would be removed or disturbed during the construction of the proposed depot facilities and realignment of the Denali Park Road.

Soils and Topography: Existing soil strata would be altered or removed and landform would be changed as a result of construction of the proposed depot facilities and realignment of the Denali Park Road.

Wetlands: Wetlands would be removed or disturbed by the proposed expansion of the depot facilities and the road realignment.

Wildlife: Wildlife habitat for small mammals, birds, and moose would be reduced by the depot expansion and road realignment. Noise and activity levels around the construction zone would disturb wildlife and cause them to avoid the area during this period.

Air Quality: Air quality would be adversely affected by intermittent dust from construction activities.

Cultural Resources: Archeological resources would be disturbed by the depot expansion and road realignment.

Aesthetics and Visitor Use: The visitor experience would be affected by construction of the depot and road realignment. Noise and visual impacts from construction activities would disturb visitors around the depot and hotel area. A segment of the existing roadside trail would be closed and relocated. Temporary depot facilities would be used during the construction period, which may inconvenience park visitors, tour groups, and tour operations.

Safety: Pedestrian and vehicular traffic conflicts create safety concerns in the depot area. Congested and poorly designed parking lots could cause bus, van, and private vehicle conflicts, and pose a risk to pedestrians.

Park Operations: Larger depot facilities would increase the demands on the park utility system. The potential increased number of visitors could create scheduling problems for park tour operators. Post-construction facilities could be more aesthetically compatible with the park environment and could function better for visitor use.

Socioeconomic Resources: Visitation to Denali may increase due to the expansion of rail services. This may translate into an overall increase in tourist dollars to the local business community.

Several issues were considered in the planning process but were considered insignificant. The proposed action is not within the wilderness area boundaries of Denali National Park and Preserve and would not adversely affect the qualities and characteristics of the wilderness area. The proposed action would not adversely affect threatened or endangered species as none are found in the project area (G. Balogh, USFWS, pers. comm., August 10, 1999). The proposed action and alternatives would have no adverse effects on subsistence uses in Denali National Park and Preserve (Appendix A). No impacts would occur to water quality, floodplains, or wild or scenic rivers.

Under the No-Action Alternative, no expansion of the railroad depot facilities would take place. No construction of new facilities, or expansion of the parking lots, would occur. The Alaska Railroad would continue to use the existing facilities (Figure 2).

The following is a discussion of the temporary passenger loading and off-loading areas that would be required under alternatives 2, 3, and 4.

A temporary facility for passenger loading and off-loading would be constructed on the ARRC easement on the east side of the main tracks to support passenger services during the construction period (Figure 3). Depot and train traffic would be routed to the existing airport access road from the Denali Park Road to the temporary off-loading and boarding facilities. The airport access road would be graded and resurfaced with gravel prior to establishing the temporary facilities. The road would allow for bus parking, loading, and off-loading, with a turn-around area for buses at the end of the road.

Site improvements needed to provide a safe passenger area on the east side of the tracks would be completed by the ARRC prior to the start of the visitor use season. This work would require approximately 12,000 cubic yards of gravel fill for staging and transition areas between the passenger train and the bus loading operations. Fill would be transported by rail from an existing ARRC gravel reserve near Anderson, outside the park boundary. A 60-foot-wide by 1,800 foot-long gravel pad with suitable hard surface would be constructed between the bus loading and off-loading area and the train, to provide accessibility for passengers with disabilities. The pad would be constructed as fill was delivered on site, and no fill storage area would be required. The pad would become a permanent part of the railroad easement. Temporary passenger accommodations would be provided for with covered tent shelters at locations sufficient to protect waiting passengers from inclement weather. The expected acreage of disturbance for the site improvements would be no greater than 3.0 acres.

The following equipment would be used under all three action alternatives. For the depot site and any road construction activities, the equipment required includes: track excavator, small and medium size bulldozers, 12 to 15 cubic yard dump trucks, self-propelled compactor, road grader, and miscellaneous hand operated power equipment. Additional equipment, including a crane, pile driver, concrete pump, and miscellaneous hand tools, may be needed to accomplish the installation and construction of new service utility systems, building foundation work, site grading, and road construction work.

Put Figure 2

Construction of the temporary facilities would begin in May 2000. Construction of the new facilities would be initiated in August 2000, with the heaviest construction activity taking place in the shoulder seasons between September 2000 and May 2001, and follow-up site work completed by July 2001.

The ARRC would expand their facilities east of the Denali Park Road, no realignment of the existing park road would occur, and the existing railroad wye would remain in place (Figure 4).

Components of Alternative 2 include: 1) constructing a new railroad depot; 2) constructing one new access road and improving the existing southern access road, and expanding the parking facilities for buses and other vehicles; 3) constructing an elevated platform; and 4) restoring the existing north access road with native vegetation.

A 15,000 square foot depot would be constructed in a linear design, west of the existing tracks north of the existing depot site. It would be constructed within the existing easement. The depot would include: a lobby; rest rooms; NPS interpretive area; a snack bar, coffee counter, and support area; newsstand area; an area for railroad operations; equipment storage; security check-in area; baggage retrieval area; dumpster; storage lockers; outdoor waiting area; baggage shelters; and pull contractor/tour group arrival and departure terminals.

Covered waiting areas would be located on both sides of the depot, 20 to 50 feet from the existing railroad tracks, to provide shelter for passengers awaiting the train.

A one-way entry and one-way exit road would access the two parking lots, which would be located on each side of the depot building. Each lot would have space for 20 buses, with additional space for bus and equipment drop off. There would be parking for 10 private and staff vehicles. Creation of separate access roads and parking lots to separate private vehicles and tour buses would not be feasible under this alternative due to the space limitations.

Baggage areas would be designated at each side of the facility. Vans and trucks hauling baggage for the pull contractors and tour groups would access these areas from parking lots.

A 6-inch to 4-foot high asphalt platform would be constructed between the tracks and the depot to accommodate passenger access to and from rail cars. The optimum height would be determined during the depot design phase.

The total new surface disturbance caused by the construction of the depot, access roads, and parking lots would be approximately 16,900 square feet (0.4 acres), all within the ARRC's easement.

Put Figure 3 Available via hard copy – call park headquarters at (907)683-2294

Put Figure 4 Available via hard copy – call park headquarters at (907)683-2294

Pedestrians would continue to access existing park trails through the depot parking lots. Signs would be developed to direct passengers to the appropriate loading areas and trails.

Vegetation would be planted and disturbed areas would be reseeded with native vegetation. As much as possible, vegetative buffer zones around the facilities would be protected during the construction activities. Landscaping with native vegetation would supplement these buffer zones. The total area to be restored and revegetated with native vegetation under this alternative is approximately 44,700 square feet (1.0 acre), most of which would be from eliminating the wye and revegetating this area.

Components of the proposed action include: 1) constructing a new railroad depot; 2) constructing three access roads, two baggage area access roads, and parking facilities for buses and other vehicles; 3) constructing an asphalt platform; 4) realigning the park road approximately 200 feet west of the existing road; 5) restoring the disturbed areas with native vegetation; and 6) landscaping with native vegetation to provide screening between the parking facilities and the depot, and the depot area and the park road (Figure 5).

The Alaska Railroad proposes to construct a 15,000 square foot railroad depot west of the existing tracks on the existing depot site, within the existing ARCC easement. The proposed depot would include: a lobby; rest rooms; NPS interpretive area; a snack bar, coffee counter, and support area; newsstand area; an area for railroad operations; equipment storage; security check-in area; baggage retrieval area; dumpster; storage lockers; outdoor waiting area; baggage shelters; and pull contractor/tour group arrival and departure terminals. Facility design would accommodate a viewing platform, and barriers would be placed to prevent passengers from crossing or walking on the railroad tracks.

Long, covered waiting areas would be located on both sides of the depot, 20 to 50 feet from the existing railroad tracks, to provide shelter for passengers awaiting the train, and allow passengers to move more freely when loading and off-loading the train.

Three access routes would lead vehicular traffic into the three depot parking lots. The northern and southern access routes would lead to the separate tour bus parking lots. The center access road would lead to the center lot, which is designated for private passenger vehicles and recreation vehicles only. Each bus lot would have space for 20 buses, with additional space for bus loading and equipment. There would be parking for 20 staff and private vehicles and additional space for six recreational vehicles. Circulation would minimize vehicle, bus, and pedestrian conflicts. Site drainage considerations would be considered in the design phase to alleviate the existing run-off problems that occur from the depot parking area to the airstrip.

Two roads to access railroad baggage areas would be constructed at each side of the facility. These routes would provide direct access to vans and trucks hauling baggage for the pull contractors and tour groups. It would be necessary to remove the existing railroad wye to

accommodate the northern baggage access road. A new location for the wye has not been selected yet. Alternative locations and impacts due to the relocation of the wye would be evaluated in a future document.

A 6-inch to 4-foot high asphalt platform would be constructed between the tracks and the depot to accommodate passenger access to and from rail cars. The optimum height would be determined during the depot design phase.

The park entrance road, between the existing mercantile and the park hotel, would be realigned to allow for the expansion of the depot and parking facilities, to improve traffic circulation, and to allow for the creation of a vegetative buffer zone between the road, depot, and hotel area. The road would be located up to approximately 200 feet west of the existing roadway. There would be 1,800 linear feet of 38-foot-wide roadway, with an additional cleared corridor of up to 10 feet wide, created under this realignment alternative. The total disturbed area of new road would be 68,400 square feet (2.0 acres), including shoulders and side slopes. Park utility corridors in the proposed construction zone would be deepened in within their existing locations.

The total new surface disturbance caused by the construction of the proposed depot, road segments, parking lots, and road realignment would be approximately 218,000 square feet

(5.0 acres).

Segments of the roadside trail that would be removed under the proposed action would be relocated. New pedestrian trails would be constructed within the area disturbed by construction activities and would lead to the existing park roadside and campground trails, and to the park’s future science center, as planned for in the 1997 Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS. Signs would be developed to direct passengers to the appropriate loading areas and trails.

Restoration would occur to segments of the abandoned park entrance road. Vegetation would be planted and the areas would be reseeded with native vegetation. As much as possible, existing vegetative buffer zones around the facilities would be protected during the construction activities. Landscaping with native vegetation would supplement these buffer zones.

The total area to be restored and revegetated with native vegetation under the proposed alternative is approximately 94,500 square feet (2.2 acres).

The cost of the proposed depot expansion and facility construction is estimated at $6.2 million. The cost of the road realignment in this alternative would be an estimated $1.0 million.

Figure 5 Available via hard copy – call park headquarters at (907)683-2294

This alternative would be a modification of the proposed action. The railroad depot facilities would be constructed as specified in Alternative 3; however, segments of the park entrance road would be reconstructed using the existing park hotel access road as a basis for the road corridor, approximately 600 feet west of the existing park road (Figure 6). This would allow for the expansion of the depot facilities, parking lots, improved traffic circulation, and the creation of a vegetative buffer between the railroad facilities and the park road.

Most of the existing park road would be maintained to provide access to the depot area. Two access roads would lead vehicular traffic into the three depot parking lots. The northern access road would lead to one of the separate tour bus parking lots. The southern access road would lead to two roads, one to the southern tour bus parking lot, and one to the center lot, which is designated for private passenger vehicles and recreation vehicles only. Each bus lot would have space for 20 buses, with additional space for bus loading and equipment. There would be parking for 20 staff and private vehicles and additional space for six recreational vehicles. Circulation was designed to minimize vehicle, bus, and pedestrian conflicts. Site drainage considerations would be considered in the design phase to alleviate the existing run-off problems that occur from the depot parking area to the airstrip.

Utilities in the proposed construction zone would be placed deeper within the existing park utility corridor locations.

Two roads to access railroad baggage areas would be constructed off each access road to the facility. These routes would provide direct access to vans and trucks hauling baggage for the pull contractors and tour groups. It would be necessary to remove the existing railroad wye to accommodate the northern baggage access road. A new location for the wye has not been selected yet. Alternative locations and impacts due to the relocation of the wye would be evaluated in a future document

The total acreage affected by the construction of the railroad depot, facilities, and frontage road would be approximately 209,000 square feet (4.8 acres). To improve sight distance at junctions with the hotel access road, approximately 1,000 lineal feet of new road would be constructed. The hotel access road would be widened to 38 feet within a cleared corridor of up to 50 feet wide total. The total disturbed area of new road would be approximately 38,000 square feet (0.9 acres), including shoulder and side slopes.

As in alternative 3, segments of the roadside trail that would be removed under the proposed action would be relocated. Also, restoration would occur in the project area. Vegetation would be planted and the areas would be reseeded with native vegetation. As much as possible, existing vegetative buffer zones around the facilities would be protected during the

construction activities. Landscaping with native vegetation would supplement these buffer zones. The total area to be revegetated with native vegetation under this alternative is approximately 136,700 square feet (3.1 acres).

The cost of implementing alternative 4 would be comparable to the proposed action for three reasons. First, the depot facilities and parking lots would be the same design as alternative 3, therefore this portion of the project would cost the same. Second, to upgrade the standards and expand the hotel access road would require site improvements, including clearing the corridor, construction the road bed, improving the existing road, and constructing a new road segment in order to improve site distances. Finally, there would be an additional access road constructed to access the southern bus and private vehicle parking lots. Park engineers have determined that the cost for improving the existing road and constructing the southern access road would be comparable to the cost of constructing a new road segment as in alternative 4.

Mitigation measures are specific actions that when implemented reduce impacts, protect park resources, and protect visitors. The following mitigation would be implemented under each alternative, except the no-action alternative or as indicated below, and are assumed in the analysis of effects for each alternative.

Vegetation. As part of the restoration process, abandoned roads within the project area would be restored with native vegetation. Landscaping and replanting native vegetation would occur around the new development area. Replanting with native vegetation would replace portions of the habitat lost from the construction operations.

Water Resources. Measures to reduce surface water run-off and flooding of adjacent facilities, including the NPS airstrip, would be incorporated into alternatives 2, 3 and 4. ARRC and its engineers under contract would work with NPS engineers and hydrologists to determine surface drainage patterns. These patterns would be considered in the design and structure of the access roads, parking lots, and depot facilities.

Wetlands. The Statement of Findings, located in Appendix B, addresses wetland compensation and mitigation. In summary, a 1.1-acre wetlands area on Caribou Creek in the Kantishna Hills region of the park would be restored to provide direct compensation for wetlands lost in the railroad depot expansion project.

Cultural Resources. Surveys for cultural resources would take place prior to any construction activities. If any cultural resources are found during the survey, a determination of eligibility would be prepared. An assessment of effect would be made and appropriate steps would be taken according to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in 36

CFR 800, in consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Native American groups, and any other interested parties.

Figure 6 Available via hard copy – call park headquarters at (907)683-2294

If any previously unknown cultural resources are located during construction, the project would be halted in the discovery area until the significance of the finding could be determined by cultural resource staff.

Visitor Use. Construction activities that create traffic delays on the park road would be restricted to periods of low visitor use, such as evenings and during the off-season.

Safety. A temporary loading and off-loading area would be constructed on the east side of the tracks to keep passengers and associated vehicular traffic away from the construction zone. Most of the heavy construction would occur either during the off-season of visitor use, or on the shoulder season, so impacts to visitors are not expected. Barricades would be placed around the construction site to prevent visitor entry.

Several alternatives were discussed during the analysis process, but were eliminated from further evaluation. This section describes the alternatives that were considered and provides justification for their elimination.

The relocation of railroad tracks to the east side of the existing easement to allow for the depot and parking lot expansion was considered but ruled out from further evaluation. The maximum the track could be moved to the east, to allow for present railroad operations, would be 10 feet. Any further movement to the east would be infeasible because: 1) it would result in the loss of the house track, which is required for train loading and unloading, and 2) it would require a curve adjacent to the bridge, which is not feasible from an environmental and economic perspective (M. Fretwell, ARRC, pers. comm., August 6, 1999).

Using the park airstrip for the expansion of the depot facilities was ruled out from further analysis. The decision to close the McKinley Park airstrip to provide for potential expansion of the railroad depot has been modified. Upon additional consultation and coordination with the public and the ARCC, and additional review by the park, using the park airstrip for the expansion of the depot facilities is not considered a reasonable option. The park airstrip serves as an important base for emergency medical landings and medical evacuations via helicopter. It is also serves as an airstrip for general aviation. It will remain open for the foreseeable future for current types of use at existing levels.

Moving the railroad depot to a location outside Denali National Park and Preserve was considered but eliminated from further evaluation. The NPS views the railroad depot as a center for park infrastructure and facilities. It provides an important mode of transportation for thousands of park visitors. Area services and park operations have been scheduled based on ARRC arrival and departure times in Denali. Many tour participants are on tours with tight time frames, and adjustments to the railroad schedule would alter the amount of time allotted for tour activities. Railroad operations have an historic significance within the park. It was the first modern means of transportation into the park for visitors, and maintaining the depot within the park is integral to meeting park objectives (1995 Statement for Management, Denali National Park and Preserve). In addition to these reasons, only one additional location in the Denali area provides road access to the railroad, and that is located at Healy. Currently there are no passenger facilities available in Healy, and it was ruled out for operational reasons, as detailed below.

An alternative to stage the temporary facilities during the construction period, or permanently move the railroad depot, 13 miles north of the park in Healy was considered but eliminated from further evaluation. Timing is the main issue under this alternative. By train, Healy is approximately 1 hour north of the depot in Denali. Therefore, the northbound train would arrive in Healy 1 hour later, and the southbound train from Fairbanks would arrive in Healy 1 hour earlier. In addition, Healy is approximately 30 minutes north of Denali by motor coach. The added time would require alteration of commercial and park tour bus schedules and decrease the amount of time passengers can spend in the area. It would impact various in-park and local services, such as bus tours, raft trips, and flight seeing tours by reducing the amount of time available for visitors to use these services. The change in arrival and departure times would also impact the ARRC operating schedules, creating the need for major adjustments in scheduling and maintenance projects. Although the ARRC has not completed any comprehensive studies, it has been determined, based on experience, that the Healy relocation alternative would impact the operations too severely to make this a feasible alternative (M. Fretwell, ARRC, pers. comm., August 6, 1999).

An alternative to use the existing depot site during a two-phase construction schedule to accommodate both the passenger operations and the new depot site development was ruled out for the following reasons. It would require that the site be divided, with one side for construction activities, and one side for passenger, and would put railroad passengers and bus traffic in close proximity to the construction zone, which would create a safety hazard. The two-phase schedule would also add one year to the construction period, during which railroad passengers and park visitors would be impacted by noise and visual construction impacts. Construction costs would increase if a two-year construction schedule were implemented. Direct costs associated with an extended construction schedule relate to: the mobilization and demobilization of equipment and personnel; security, maintenance, and contract administration costs; and the cost to prepare temporary facilities for passengers and train operations during the non-construction periods.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE) is evaluating the components of the proposed action under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Appendix C). An individual permit from the USCOE would be required prior to any discharge of fill materials into wetlands on the proposed project site. In addition, Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands) requires the NPS, and other federal agencies, to evaluate the impacts its actions are likely to have on wetlands. The executive order requires that short- and long-term adverse impacts associated with occupancy, modification or destruction of wetlands be avoided whenever possible. Indirect support of development and new construction in such areas should also be avoided wherever there is a practicable alternative. The NPS Wetland Protection and Procedural Manual 77-1: Wetland Protection, emphasizes exploring all practical alternatives to building on, or otherwise affecting, wetlands; reducing impacts to wetlands whenever possible; and providing direct compensation of wetland resources by restoring degraded or destroyed wetlands on other NPS properties. This evaluation is found in the Statement of Findings (SOF) in Appendix B.

The proposed expansion of the railroad depot facilities would use Section 4(f) lands as designated by the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S. C. 303). The NPS has coordinated with the Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration to evaluate the proposed action under the requirements of Section 4(f). The Section 4(f) evaluation is found in Appendix D.

A land use agreement would be required to allow the Alaska Railroad to utilize NPS administered lands outside their existing easement. This agreement would establish conditions of use based on the rights of the existing easement and NPS policies and guidelines. An existing agreement is in place between the ARRC and the NPS that addresses the maintenance of the parking lots in the depot area.

A complete and detailed description of the environment and existing use at Denali National Park and Preserve can be found in the 1996 Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS and in the 1986 Denali General Management Plan. This section describes the portion of the natural and human environment that may be affected by the proposal and alternatives under consideration.

The project is located at T. 14 S., R. 7 W. in Denali National Park (Figure 7). It is at mile 1.5 of the Denali Park Road. The area is considered a portion of Denali’s frontcountry, an area of high visitor use, and concentrated pedestrian and vehicular traffic during the summer season.

Historically, the area near the Alaska Railroad Depot and the Denali Park Hotel has been an area of change. In the 1920s, a number of fires burned over the area. In 1939, when the first Park Hotel opened, only low shrubs existed in the area. Currently the project area consists of the taiga plant association, which is generally found below elevations of 2,700 feet. White and black spruce and spruce hybrids dominate this area. A variety of species can be found in the understory, including balsam poplar trees, and various shrubs, including willow, alder, and Alaska rose.

Figure 7 Here

There are generally two types of soils in the project area. Underlying the forested areas are sandy, silty clay soils, with humus layers that support mosses and lichens. In the wetlands areas, the soils consist of clay and glacial moraine.

The wetlands located within the proposed project area consist of wet scrublands and forested wetlands. The core area of wetlands are classified as Palustrine Scrub-Shrub, Broad-leaved Deciduous, Seasonally Flooded wetlands (PSS1B) according to the Cowardin Classification System (Cowardin et al. 1979). The areas surrounding these core wetlands are classified as Palustrine Forested, Needle-leaved Evergreen, Seasonally Flooded wetlands (PF04B). Wetlands in Denali National Park and Preserve provide important habitat for resident and migratory birds, and foraging areas for moose.

Denali National Park and Preserve is a Federal class I air quality area. Air quality is currently monitored through the following nationwide networks: National Atmospheric Deposition Program; Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments; and the NPS ozone monitoring network. Denali achieves the highest attainable air quality levels and visibility standards in accordance with applicable Clean Air Act designations and mandates specified by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, the NPS Organic Act, and NPS policies.

The wildlife in the project area most commonly includes snowshoe hare, red squirrels, and various species of non-migratory birds such as chickadee, raven, and magpie. The area also provides good moose habitat and potential moose calving areas. Grizzly bears are occasionally seen in the area.

Cultural resources in the park entrance area include archeological sites and historic buildings and structures. Historic sites associated with the McKinley Park Station community are located near the park airstrip and Riley Creek. These include cabin foundations, fox pens, and other remains.

Three sites recorded in the vicinity of the project area are part of the general dispersed trash associated with the McKinley Park Station. The first site (SI91-1) is a pit and can burn located in the wooded area southeast of the hotel and west of the park road. The second site (SI91-4), which is adjacent to the proposed project area, north of the wye, is a can dump and pit. The third site (SI91-3), located near the airstrip access road, is a small pit with metal along one side and scattered debris.

The railroad depot is owned and operated by the Alaska Railroad Corporation. Its limited visitor services are used primarily by railroad passengers. The depot contains a waiting room, rest rooms, gift shop, coffee stand, office space, and parking lot. A combined total of over 344,000 passengers traveled by railroad to or from Denali National Park and Preserve in 1999. This number is expected to increase in the future. At train arrival time, the railroad depot and parking lot are filled with buses, vans, baggage trucks, and other vehicles. Tour guides organize groups, unload freight, and shuttle baggage.

The Denali Park Road generally runs east to west, but winds its way between the railroad depot and the Denali Park Hotel in a north to south alignment. Hiking trails link the railroad depot with the hotel, and other entrance area trails. The 1997 approved Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP stipulated that the park hotel will be closed in 2002, and replaced by an Environmental Education and Science Center.

This section contains the environmental impacts, including direct and indirect effects and their significance of the alternatives and the proposed action. The analysis assumes that a temporary loading and off-loading facility would be constructed on the east side of the railroad tracks, within the existing ARRC easement. It also assumes that the mitigation identified in the Mitigation and Monitoring section of this environmental assessment would be implemented under any of the action alternatives.

In addition, cumulative impacts were analyzed for the alternatives and the proposed action. Cumulative impacts are the incremental impacts on the environment resulting from adding the alternatives to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The cumulative impacts relate primarily to the implementation of the 1997 Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS, and to the predicted increases in railroad passengers traveling to Denali National Park and Preserve. A detailed cumulative impact analysis for implementing the proposed action of the 1997 Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS, which includes the construction of a new railroad depot, is found within the DCP/EIS.

The cumulative impact analysis also recognizes the predicted increase in railroad passengers and park visitors. The ARRC will continue marketing its services to Denali and, based on past increases, predicts at least a 30 percent increase in passengers in the next 20 years. It is likely that the ARRC would change the current train schedule between Anchorage and Fairbanks in the next few years, no matter which alternative is selected. In the short-term, the new train schedule would decrease congestion by reducing the number of passengers arriving and departing at one time. However, the ARRC predicts they will add additional cars to the trains, which would lead to increased number of passengers arriving and departing from the depot daily. This increase in passengers, and expected increases in overall park visitation, could put pressure on park resources and facilities. Regional planning efforts by the NPS have recognized the predicted increase of visitation. The NPS based the Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS proposed actions on effectively managing park visitation to prevent impacts to park resources while providing visitors with unique opportunities to enjoy the park.

No impacts to vegetation and soils would occur.

No impacts to wetlands would occur.

Minor, short-term impacts to air quality would continue to occur at the railroad depot site from vehicle exhaust. These impacts currently occur for approximately one hour increments, during train arrival and departure periods, twice daily, primarily during periods of high visitor use from June to September. After the future implementation of the new train schedule, vehicle and bus loading and off-loading would occur for approximately one hour increments, four times daily, during train arrival and departure periods. This impact occurs primarily during the high visitor use season between June and early September and does not have a measurable effect to overall park air quality.

Wildlife would continue to avoid the railroad depot area during periods of high visitor use, which currently occurs for approximately one hour increments, during train arrival and departure periods, twice daily, primarily during periods of high visitor use from June to September. After the planned implementation of the new train schedule, periods of high visitor use would occur daily for approximately two hours in the morning, and two hours in the afternoon, during train arrival and departure periods, with the majority of visitor activity occurring from June to September.

No impacts to cultural resources would occur.

Train passengers would continue to crowd inside the existing railroad depot facility during train arrival and departure times, although crowding would be temporarily reduced if the new train schedule is implemented sometime after 2001. No additional services would be provided to the passengers. The facility does not provide adequate services, including appropriate numbers of rest rooms, safe access to and from the railroad and the depot area, and parking space for existing and future passenger needs, even with the implementation of the new train schedule.

The parking lots would continue to pose a safety hazard due to vehicle and pedestrian conflicts, and passenger vehicle and tour bus conflicts, during train arrival and departure periods, which occur twice daily. If the new train schedule were implemented, the hazard of passenger vehicle and tour bus conflicts would be reduced since private passengers and tour passengers would have different arrival and departure times.

Vehicle traffic accessing the depot area would continue to cause delays on the park road during train arrival and departure periods. No trail reconstruction would be necessary to accommodate the new facilities.

There would be no changes in the socioeconomic environment under the no action alternative.

The cumulative impacts of the no action alternative are related to the predicted increases in railroad passengers.

Large mammal movements and habitat are already affected by vehicular travel on the park road, and by visitor use in the depot and hotel areas. Large mammals generally avoid areas during periods of high visitor use and alter their movements based on levels of vehicular traffic on the park road. No significant cumulative impacts on wildlife habitat or wildlife behavior would be anticipated.

The main impacts of the no action alternative revolve around passenger use and park operations. Train passengers would not be provided adequate services and facilities. Parking lots would be congested and pose vehicular and passenger safety hazards during train arrival and departure times. Vehicle traffic on the park road would continue to endure short-term delays around the depot area during train arrival and departure times.

The following section evaluates the impacts related to the alternatives for temporary railroad depot facilities that would be required under all the action alternatives during the construction period.

Constructing the temporary facilities to the east side of the railroad tracks would affect no more than 3.0 acres of land within the existing ARRC easement. All of this area has been previously disturbed by past projects, and only a small portion is vegetated with shrubs and annual plants. Approximately 12,000 cubic yards of gravel fill obtained from existing gravel pit owned and operated by ARRC and located outside park boundaries, would be placed in the area to construct a staging and transition area between the passenger train and the bus boarding area. Existing vegetation, primarily shrubs, including alder and willow, and annual plants, would be removed within the easement to accommodate bus access and parking. This area is a previously disturbed area of low value for wildlife habitat because of its small size and its proximity to train and aircraft operations. Therefore, the impacts would be of minor consequence. This alternative would not affect airstrip operations.

A 0.39-acre area of vegetation, including willow and alder shrubs, and white spruce trees, would be permanently removed from the project area. The construction of temporary loading and off-loading facilities would impact approximately 3.0 acres of land within the railroad easement on the east side of the rail tracks. All of this area has been previously disturbed by past projects, and only a small portion is vegetated with shrubs and annual plants. Soils would be permanently disturbed or removed from the project area. Considering the small size of the acreage to be affected by this alternative, and the moderate value of the habitat, this is considered a minor impact.

Wetlands would not be adversely affected under this alternative.

Construction activities would generate dust and increase airborne pollutants over existing levels. This would create temporary, minor impacts to air quality, localized around the construction site during the approximately nine month construction period. The impacts to air quality from vehicular and bus traffic would be the same as alternative 1. These effects are insignificant in relation to the park’s overall air quality and would not exceed the NAAQS or allowable class I increments.

Approximately 0.39 acre of moderate quality wildlife habitat at the depot area, and 3.0 acres of low quality wildlife habitat on the east side of the tracks, would be removed under this alternative. This area is not considered critical wildlife habitat. Most of it has been previously disturbed by the placement of the existing depot facilities and parking lots.

No cultural resources are located within the existing railroad easement. No impacts to cultural resources would occur.

Under this alternative, the depot design would be redesigned and visitor facilities would be expanded. Visitors would benefit after the construction of the depot facilities from improved services. Pedestrian trails would still route visitor through the parking lots to the buses and adjacent park trails, and conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles would continue. The new facility would be constructed according to NPS design standards to blend in with the natural environment of Denali National Park and Preserve.

Visitors expect to be in a natural setting in the park, and visual and audible impacts from construction operations could adversely affect the visitor experience during the construction period. This would affect visitors in the hotel and depot area and along the park road corridor. Since park road construction would not be a component of this alternative, construction operations would be limited to the depot and parking lot areas, and would impact less area than alternatives 3 and 4. Construction activities could cause temporary delays to travel on the park road. Since the primary heavy construction period would occur during the lower visitor use, between September and May, these impacts are expected to be negligible.

This alternative would address limited safety issues. Pedestrian trails would not route passengers away from parking lots and safety issues would remain. Private vehicles and buses would share the same access roads and parking lots, which could lead to unsafe conditions. Traffic flow and circulation patterns would not be improved. Line of sight from the access roads to the park road would be the same as it is now, and would be better for this alternative than for alternatives 3 and 4 (final design could improve this situation for the latter two alternatives).

NPS staff would be assigned to monitor the construction operations, which would make staff unavailable for other park operations for a limited time. This could have a minor impact on park operations during the construction period. Construction activities could cause temporary short-term delays on the park road which would impact park vehicles and concession-operated tours. Since construction is scheduled to occur during periods of lower visitor use, from September to May, and delays are not expected to exceed 15 minutes, these impacts are considered minor and insignificant.

Interpretive staff would be required to work the NPS information booth at the depot after construction is completed. This would be accomplished by hiring additional seasonal or permanent staff. Staff size would depend upon the hours of operation.

Construction activities at the depot could increase the number of temporary construction jobs in the local economy. Expenditures for development-related materials and labor during construction could provide short-term economic benefits to the local economy, as well as other parts of the Alaskan economy. If supplies were purchased from local dealers, benefits to the local economy would be moderate; however, if supplies were imported from outside Alaska, there would be negligible, if any, benefits to the local economy. A total of two to three seasonal ARRC jobs would be added at the depot facility and this would benefit some individuals.

When adding the effects to vegetation and soils from this alternative to other proposed development within the park, it is unlikely that an additional 4.39-acre area of disturbance from this alternative and the temporary loading and off-loading facility would result in long-term significant cumulative impacts to vegetation and soils.

Large mammal movements and habitat are already affected by vehicular travel on the park road, and by visitor use in the depot and hotel areas. Large mammals generally avoid areas during periods of high visitor use and alter their movements based on levels of vehicular traffic on the park road. Additional impacts to large mammals from the depot expansion would be small and transient. No significant cumulative impacts on wildlife habitat or wildlife behavior would be anticipated.

Overall, the visitor experience in the frontcountry area of Denali National Park and Preserve is expected to improve with the implementation of the DCP/EIS. A variety of new opportunities would be available for visitors to the frontcountry. Visitors would have access to new facilities, campgrounds, and trails. The expansion of the Alaska Railroad Depot would improve the visitor experience by creating better facilities and services for railroad passengers.

More railroad passengers equates to more passengers on the two concession tours in the park, and these tours could eventually reach capacity. The predicted increase in railroad passengers would affect the concession-operated bus tours. Schedules would need to be adjusted to meet the demands of the new train arrival and departure times. More visitors would be expected to use the bus tours, and tours may reach capacity.

Expansion of visitor services inside the park and more railroad passengers could cause additional development outside the park. In addition, increased visitation could cause increased pressure for development inside the park. The selected actions in the DCP/EIS were planned on a regional context to balance actions occurring within the park, and outside the park, to minimize congestion and cumulative impacts. No significant cumulative impacts are expected from this alternative when adding it to other park and regional actions.

A 0.39-acre area of vegetation and wildlife habitat would be permanently removed from the project area, and an additional 3.0 acres would be destroyed by the creation of the temporary loading and off-loading facilities. With the elimination of the wye, this approximately 1-acre area would be revegetated with native plants. Soils would be removed and the topography would be altered. Temporary, minor, localized impacts to air quality would occur during construction. Visitors could be temporarily affected by the noise and visual intrusion of construction activities. Visitors would benefit in the long-term from an improved depot facility. All the safety and congestion issues would not be resolved, and pedestrian and vehicle, and bus conflicts would continue. Construction activities could cause temporary delays on the park road. Construction activities could provide short-term economic benefits to local economy.

The expansion of the railroad depot, parking facilities, and realignment of the park road would remove 5.0 acres of spruce forest and related vegetation. The construction of temporary loading and off-loading facilities would impact approximately 3.0 acres of land within the railroad easement on the east side of the rail tracks. All of this area has been previously disturbed by past projects. Revegetation and landscaping efforts would restore 2.2 acres of park land around the depot facility. A 5.0-acre area of soil would be permanently removed and/or the topography would be permanently altered by adding fill where required by the implementation of the proposed action.

The proposed action would permanently remove 1.1 acres of wetlands associated with the taiga spruce forest complex.

Same as alternative 2.

The construction represents an expansion of existing development, and would occur in an area already experiencing human intrusions. The proposed development would commit 5.0 acres of wildlife habitat to development, which includes potential moose calving areas. Small mammals and birds may be permanently displaced by project construction due to loss of nest sites and forage species. An additional 3.0 acres of low quality wildlife habitat would be impacted on the east side of the track. All of the area on the east side of the tracks has been previously disturbed by past projects. The availability of undisturbed habitat nearby would be expected to decrease the severity of these impacts. In addition, disturbed sites would be restored both naturally and by NPS biologists in an attempt to replace the habitat values located at the site prior to construction. Impacts resulting from habitat loss are not expected to have long-term adverse effects on local populations of mammals and birds.

The realignment of a segment of the park road would impact a small cultural site classified as a pit and can burn (SI91-1). This site is probably not significant in and of itself but may take on more importance as part of the bigger scene of McKinley Park Station. Appropriate steps would be taken according to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in 36 CFR 800, in consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Native American groups, and any other interested parties. The site would be tested prior to construction and a determination of eligibility would be prepared and an assessment of effect would be completed.

The proposed action would provide improved services at the Alaska Railroad Depot, including more rest rooms, food services, and improved waiting areas. New traffic circulation patterns, expanded parking lots would reduce risks to vehicles, and walkways would reduce risks to pedestrians. The new facility would be constructed according to NPS design standards to blend in with the natural environment of Denali National Park and Preserve. Landscaping with native plants, and revegetation would provide partial screening from the railroad tracks and from the park roads.

During construction periods, the view of and noise from the construction equipment and operations could disturb the visitor. Visitors expect to be in a natural setting in the park, and visual and audible impacts from construction operations could adversely affect the visitor experience during the construction period. This would affect visitors in the hotel and depot area and along the park road corridor. This would be a temporary, localized impact around the railroad and hotel facilities during the construction period. Short-term traffic delays could disrupt visitors traveling on the park road. Since heavy construction is scheduled to occur during periods of low visitor use, from September to May, these impacts are considered minor and insignificant.

The new depot and parking lot design would reduce safety hazards to passengers and park visitors. Pedestrian trails and signs would be used to lead visitors to appropriate loading areas and park trails. Private vehicles and tour buses would use separate access roads and parking lots, and this would minimize potential vehicle conflicts. Circulation design would minimize congestion of both passengers and vehicles. Line of sight from the access roads to the park road would be worse for this alternative than for alternatives 1 and 2 (final design could improve this situation, however). Depot design, including an elevated viewing platform and barriers, would help minimize pedestrian access to the railroad tracks.

Under this alternative, the park would realign a segment of the Denali Park Road. The utility corridor in the project area would be altered to place utilities deeper into the ground, in its existing location, thus no new impacts to park resources would occur. However, park maintenance staff or contractors would be required to complete this work. Park staff, if used, would be temporarily redirected from their normal duties to deepen the utility corridor. Construction of the depot and the new segment of the park road would create temporary impacts to park operations during construction periods. NPS staff would need to be assigned to monitor the construction operations, primarily for the road realignment portion of the project. Construction activities could cause traffic delays in the park road area, up to 15 minutes, and could result in slight delays of NPS employees and concession-operated tours. Since the heavy construction is scheduled to occur during periods of low visitor use, from September to May, these impacts are considered minor and insignificant.

The effects of the proposed action on the socioeconomic environment would be the same as Alternative 2.

Cumulative impacts from the proposed action are similar to the cumulative impacts described in alternative 3. The removal of vegetation for the expansion of the depot facilities, construction of access roads, and realignment of the park road would reduce the vegetative buffer between the road and the depot area, and provide a direct view of the depot site from the park road. This would affect the park visitor who expects to see a more natural park setting.

When adding the effects to vegetation and soils from this alternative to other proposed development within the park, it is unlikely that an additional 9.0-acre area of disturbance from this alternative and the temporary loading and off-loading facility would result in long-term significant cumulative impacts to vegetation and soils. No significant cumulative impacts from wildlife habitat loss are anticipated.

Approximately 5.0 acres of vegetation and wildlife habitat, including 1.1 acres of wetlands, would be removed due to the expansion of the railroad depot and facilities, and an additional 3.0 acres would be disturbed by the creation of the temporary loading and off-loading facilities. Construction activities would cause localized, minor, short-term impacts to air quality, create visual impacts and noise, and cause temporary delays on the Denali Park Road. An insignificant small cultural site would be removed from the construction area. The proposed depot facility would provide a safer visitor environment and improved visitor services.

Approximately 4.8 acres of vegetation would be lost from the depot expansion, parking lot construction, and road realignment of the park road using the existing hotel access road as a base. The construction of temporary loading and off-loading facilities would impact approximately 3.0 acres of land within the railroad easement on the east side of the rail tracks, which has been previously disturbed by past projects.

A total of 1.3 acres of wetlands would be permanently removed from the project area.

Temporary and minor impacts associated with construction activities would be the same as alternative 3.

Impacts to wildlife would be the same as alternative 3.

Impacts to cultural resources would be the same as alternative 3.

The impacts associated with visitor use and aesthetics would be the same as alternative 3, except more undisturbed vegetative buffer would be retained between the park road and the depot, effectively screening the depot area from the park road. However, this alternative would not provide vegetative screening between the park road and the planned science center at the existing park hotel site. Park road traffic would be directed immediately adjacent to the proposed science center site with minimal opportunities to buffer.

Impacts to park operations would be the same as alternative 3, with one additional impact. Under this alternative, the expansion of the existing hotel access road could influence the design of the future science center.

Impacts to safety would be the same as those described under alternative 3.

The impacts from this alternative would be the same as alternative 3.

Cumulative impacts from the proposed action are the same as the cumulative impacts described in alternative 3, No significant cumulative impacts from vegetation and habitat loss are anticipated.

In summary, the realignment of the park road and expansion of the railroad depot would cause 4.8 acres of ground disturbance, including the loss of 1.3 acres of wetlands. The construction of temporary loading and off-loading facilities on the east side of the tracks would permanently impact an additional 3.0 acres.

Construction activities would generate dust and create short-term, localized impacts to air quality. Noise from the construction would create short-term, temporary disturbances to wildlife and area visitors. In the long-term, the expansion of the railroad depot would have a positive impact on the visitor experience and provide a safer environment. The depot area would have improved visitor facilities and improved and safer vehicular and pedestrian access.

Public notice of the availability of this environmental assessment was published in local newspapers, and on the Denali National Park and Preserve website. The environmental assessment is available by request in writing, by phone, or by E:mail. The environmental assessment was circulated to individuals, business, and organizations on the park’s mailing list for a 30-day public review period.

This document was prepared by Nancy Hendricks, Compliance Specialist, National Park Service, Denali National Park and Preserve.

The following persons and agencies were consulted in preparation of this environmental assessment:

Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration (Cooperating Agency)

Alaska Railroad Corporation

Koonce Pfeffer Bettis, Incorporated

Tryck Nyman Hayes, Incorporated

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Section, Alaska District

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Threatened and Endangered Species Office

Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Nancy Swanton, Chief of Planning and Compliance

Steve Carwile, Park Compliance Officer

Mike Tranel, Park Planner

Elwood Lynn, Facilities Manager

Joe Durrenberger, Park Engineer

Gordon Olson, Chief of Research and Resource Preservation

Hollis Twitchell, Subsistence Specialist

Jon Paynter, Information Resource Specialist

Andrea Blakesley, Resource Management Specialist, Air Quality

Jerry Belant, Wildlife Biologist

Maureen Lynch, Writer/Editor

Joan Darnell, Team Leader, Environmental Quality

Glen Yankus, Environmental Protection Specialist

Heather Todd, Environmental Protection Specialist

Paul Schrooten, Landscape Architect

Joel Wagner, Hydrologist

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY EVALUATION AND FINDINGS

This section was prepared to comply with Title VIII, Section 810 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). It summarizes the evaluation of potential restrictions to subsistence activities which could result from the redesign and construction of the Alaska Railroad Depot facilities in Denali National Park and Preserve.

Section 810(a) of ANILCA states:

ANILCA created new units and additions to existing units of the National Park System in Alaska. Denali National Park and Preserve was created by ANILCA Section 202(3)(a):

Title I of ANILCA established national parks for the following purposes:

The potential for significant restriction must be evaluated for the proposed action's effect upon ". . . subsistence uses and needs, the availability of other lands for the purposes sought to be achieved and other alternatives which would reduce or eliminate the use. . . ." (Section 810(a))

Proposed alternatives 1 through 4 are described in detail in the environmental assessment. Customary and traditional subsistence use on NPS lands will continue as authorized by federal law under all alternatives. Federal regulations implement a subsistence priority for rural residents of Alaska under Title VIII of ANILCA.

The NPS and Alaska Railroad Corporation have proposed to enlarge the existing Alaska Railroad Depot facilities within Denali National Park and Preserve. The site is in the former Mount McKinley National Park wherein subsistence activities are not allowed.

Subsistence uses within Denali National Park and Preserve are permitted in accordance with Titles II and VIII of ANILCA. Section 202(3)(a) of ANILCA authorizes subsistence uses, where traditional, in the northwestern and southwestern preserves of Denali National Preserve. Lands within former Mount McKinley National Park are closed to subsistence uses.

A regional population of approximately 300 eligible local rural residents qualify for subsistence use of park resources. Resident zone communities for Denali National Park and Preserve are Cantwell, Minchumina, Nikolai, and Telida. By virtue of their residence, local rural residents of these communities are eligible to pursue subsistence activities in the new park additions. Local rural residents who do not live in the designated resident zone communities, but who have customarily and traditionally engaged in subsistence activities within the park additions, may continue to do so pursuant to a subsistence permit issued by the Park Superintendent in accordance with state law and regulations.

The NPS realizes that Denali National Park and Preserve may be especially important to certain communities and households in the area for subsistence purposes. The resident zone communities of Minchumina (population 22) and Telida (population 11) use park and preserve lands for trapping and occasional moose hunting along area rivers. Nicolai (population 122) is a growing community and has used park resources in the past. Cantwell (population 147) is the largest resident zone community for Denali National Park and Preserve, and local residents hunt moose and caribou, trap, and harvest firewood and other subsistence resources in the new park area.

The main subsistence species, by edible weight, are moose, caribou, furbearers, and fish. Varieties of subsistence fish include coho, king, pink and sockeye salmon. Burbot, dolly varden, grayling, lake trout, northern pike, rainbow trout and whitefish are also among the variety of fish used by local people. Beaver, coyote, land otter, weasel, lynx, marten, mink, muskrat, red fox, wolf and wolverine are important furbearer resources. Rock and willow ptarmigan, grouse, ducks and geese complete the park/preserve subsistence small game list.

The NPS recognizes that patterns of subsistence use vary from time to time and from place to place depending on the availability of wildlife and other renewable natural resources. A subsistence harvest in any given year many vary considerably from previous years because of such factors as weather, migration patterns and natural population cycles. However, the pattern is assumed to be generally applicable to harvests in recent years with variations of reasonable magnitude.

To determine the potential impact on existing subsistence activities, three evaluation criteria were analyzed relative to existing subsistence resources which could be impacted.

The evaluation criteria are:

• the potential to reduce important subsistence fish and wildlife populations by (a) reductions in numbers; (b) redistribution of subsistence resources; or (c) habitat losses;
• the affect the action might have on subsistence fishing or hunting access;
• the potential to increase fishing or hunting competition for subsistence resources.

The potential to reduce populations:

Land use activities could have temporary and/or long-term impacts on wildlife habitat, depending on the nature and extent of the disturbance.

The proposed actions would not adversely affect the distribution or migration patterns of subsistence resources. Therefore, no change in the availability of subsistence resources is anticipated as a result of the implementation of this proposed action.

Restriction of Access:

All rights of access for subsistence harvests on NPS lands are granted by Section 811 of ANILCA. Denali National Park and Preserve is managed according to legislative mandates, NPS management policies and the park’s General Management Plan. No actions under the proposals which are described in the environmental assessment, should affect the access of subsistence users to natural resources in the park and preserve.

Increase in Competition:

The proposed action should not produce any increase in competition for resources to subsistence users.

If, and when, it is necessary to restrict taking, subsistence uses are the priority consumptive users on public lands of Alaska and will be given preference on such lands over other consumptive uses (ANILCA, Section 802(2)).

Continued implementation of provisions of ANILCA should mitigate any increased competition, however significant, from resource users other than subsistence users. Therefore, the proposed action would not adversely affect resource competition.

The impacts to park resources would not be decreased by choosing a different site.

The alternatives considered during this project were limited to the existing Alaska Railroad Corporation easement located with Denali National Park and Preserve, and park complex and lands immediately adjacent to this easement.

This analysis concludes that the proposed action would not result in a significant restriction of subsistence uses.

APPENDIX B

Statement of Findings for

Executive Order 11990 "Protection of Wetlands"

Alaska Railroad Depot Expansion and Park Road Realignment

Denali National Park and Preserve, Alaska

November 1999

Recommended:

Superintendent, Denali National Park and Preserve Date

Certified For Technical Accuracy and Servicewide Consistency:

Chief, Water Resources Division, Washington Office Date

Approved:

Regional Director, Alaska Region Date

The National Park Service (NPS) has prepared and made available for public review an environmental assessment (EA) to evaluate the impacts of expanding the existing Alaska Railroad Depot in Denali National Park and Preserve.

The approved 1997 Entrance Area and Road Corridor Development Concept Plan for Denali National Park and Preserve identified the need for the expansion of the railroad depot. The current depot facility does not meet current or future visitor needs, creates parking problems, traffic congestion, and safety hazards.

The NPS and the Alaska Railroad (ARRC) are working cooperatively to improve the layout of the Alaska Railroad Depot in Denali National Park and Preserve. The NPS and ARRC propose to enlarge the existing facilities and parking lots, construct a new access corridor into the depot area, and move a segment of the entrance area road to allow for a buffer between the railroad depot facilities and the entrance area road (Figure 1).

Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands) requires the NPS, and other federal agencies, to evaluate the likely impacts of actions in wetlands. The executive order requires that short and long-term adverse impacts associated with occupancy, modification or destruction of wetlands be avoided whenever possible. Indirect support of development and new construction in such areas should also be avoided wherever there is a practicable alternative.

To comply with these orders, the NPS has developed a set of agency policies and procedures which can be found in Director’s Order 77-1: Wetland Protection, and Procedural Manual 77-1: Wetland Protection. The policies and procedures related to wetlands emphasize: exploring all practical alternatives to building on, or otherwise affecting, wetlands; reducing impacts to wetlands whenever possible; and providing direct compensation for any unavoidable wetland impact by restoring degraded or destroyed wetlands on other NPS properties.

The purpose of this Statement of Findings (SOF) is to present the NPS rationale for its proposed plan to construct portions of the railroad depot expansion and park road in the wetland area. This SOF also documents the anticipated effects on these resources.

Wetland boundaries were identified in the field with flagging by NPS personnel and later surveyed by contractors to determine wetland acreage. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE) visited the project site in July 1999 and agreed with the wetlands delineation within the project area. Of the 5.0 acres affected by the proposed action, 1.1 acres (49,000 square feet) were classified as wetlands (Figure 1) under the "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States" the Cowardin Classification

Figure 1 - Proposed Project Design (See Figure 5 from Environmental Assessment)

System (Cowardin et al. 1979), and are therefore subject to NPS wetlands compliance procedures.

The wetlands located within the proposed project area consist of wet scrubland and forested wetlands. The core area of wetlands are classified as Palustrine Scrub-Shrub, Broad-leaved Deciduous, Seasonally Flooded wetlands (PSS1B). The areas surrounding these core wetlands are classified as Palustrine Forested, Needle-leaved Evergreen, Seasonally Flooded wetlands (PF04B). These wetlands provide habitat for small mammals, such as red squirrels, snowshoe hares, and porcupine; bird species, including gray jays, robins, thrushes, sparrows, and warblers. Moose frequent the area for forage, and it is considered potential moose calving area.

The major plant species on the wetland sites include black spruce, spruce hybrids, quaking aspen, willow, and alder. Common ground cover includes mosses, horsetails, and a variety of annual flowering plants. This wetland type is common throughout the eastern areas of Denali National Park and Preserve. The park has determined that the potential wetlands located at the project site are locally common and have limited environmental significance for the area, in terms of surface water quality or animal habitat.

The proposal and alternatives are described in detail in the project EA.

The construction of a new segment of park road and expansion of the Alaska Railroad Depot will impact a maximum of 1.1 acres of wetlands. The extent of disturbance is shown on the attached project plan.

To provide a stable subgrade on which to build the road, all wetland soil within the road prism and parking lots will be excavated to a bedrock or suitable subgrade material with adequate bearing capacity. Wetland soil will be replaced with clean fill and compacted, and crushed aggregate will be placed on top of the subgrade.

Discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Prior to undertaking the above activity, the NPS will have acquired an individual permit from the Corps of Engineers.

Federal and NPS Policy is to avoid siting projects in wetlands whenever possible. If circumstances make it impracticable to avoid wetlands, then mitigation of unavoidable impacts must be planned. A NPS wetlands "no-net-loss" policy requires that wetland losses be compensated for by restoration of wetlands, preferably of comparable wetland type and function and in the same watershed (if possible).

Of the 5.0 acres affected by the proposed action, 1.1 acres are classified as wetlands. This statement of findings commits to full 1:1 compensation for the disturbed acreage.

As much as possible, disturbance of wetlands in and around the project area would be avoided. Any areas disturbed by construction activities would be restored to as near natural conditions as possible. Prior to the start of construction activities, the NPS would salvage as much topsoil, organic matter, and vegetation, as feasible, for later use in site revegetation. Salvaged material would be stockpiled separately and would be returned to the disturbed areas following construction.

Approximately 2.2 acres of disturbed lands will be revegetated with native plants after the completion of the construction activities. All revegetation activities would be performed by Denali National Park and Preserve’s Resource Preservation and Research Division.

Compensation, by restoration of previously disturbed degraded wetlands, is required under the NPS no-net-loss policy for projects involving disturbance or loss of wetlands. Compensate will occur for the loss of 1.1 acres of palustrine wetland. One-for-one compensation will be completed elsewhere in the park by restoring a riverine and palustrine wetland in the Kantishna Hills region of the park (Figure 2). It is anticipated that the wetland functions and values lost at the project site will be balanced by those functions and values regained at a restored former placer mine site.

One acre within the park’s Caribou Creek claims has been selected for restoration within the scope of this mitigation. These wetlands are classified as Riverine Upper Perennial Unconsolidated Shore with Intermittent Flooding (R3USJ), and Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore Cobble Gravel Seasonally Flooded/Well-Drained (PUS1D). Restoration plans include: removing and disposing of debris; stabilizing the channel and floodplain; stabilizing the access road; and revegetating the stripped areas. Preliminary work includes water and soil sampling, and engineering surveys of the existing stream channel, floodplains, and upland topography. Discharge measurements will be collected to aid in stream channel design. Soil sampling will assess the geo-chemistry of the upper watershed, and determine the soil’s potential for revegetation efforts. Surveys, both cross-sectional and topographical, will be conducted to supplement site data on the NPS topographic maps. This information will be used to locate and estimate material amounts for use in recontouring the site and reconstructing the stream channel and floodplain.

Cost estimates for this project are approximately $15,000 per acre, based on the unpublished report, "Cost Estimation for Reclamation, National Park Service, Alaska Regional Office, January 1994." This report reviewed three separate mining reclamation projects that were conducted on abandoned claims in Denali National Park and Preserve.

Stream channel and floodplain restoration will be based on the techniques of the Glen Creek restoration project at Denali. Project design requirements will include a channel capacity

Figure 2 - Wetland Compensation from Kantishna Hills Region

for a 1.5-year (bankfull) discharge and a floodplain capacity for up to a 100-year discharge. The project design will include the use of bio-revetment, located on meanders, to encourage channel stabilization using natural methods. Brush bars, located in areas of little or no fines, will be employed to dissipate floodwater energy and encourage sediment deposition. Riparian areas will be revegetated with willow cuttings and other appropriate vegetation. Depending on the results from the soils nutrient analysis, fertilizer will be used to ensure a quick start for new vegetation.

Monitoring of the stream channel and riparian areas will occur to determine the success of the reclamation efforts. Vegetation plots and permanently mounted cross-sections will be surveyed and measured again after the first year. Additional seeding and revegetation will occur on areas not vegetated during the first year.

The no action alternative describes the existing operations at the Alaska Railroad Depot. This alternative would not alleviate the existing parking problems, safety hazards, and traffic congestion at the depot. The second alternative considered the expansion of the depot with no realignment of the Denali Park Road. While alternative 2 addressed the visitor requirements at the depot building, it did not meet the goals of alleviating existing parking problems, congestion and safety hazards at the depot.

Alternative 3, the proposed action, and alternative 4 considered the expansion of the railroad depot with the realignment of a segment of the Denali Park Road. The proposed action is the realignment of the park road approximately 200 feet west of the road’s current location. The fourth alternative would use the existing hotel access road for the road realignment base. Both alternatives would impact wetlands in the project area. Alternative 3 would impact 1.1 acres of wetlands, and alternative 4 would impact 1.3 acres of wetlands.

Several alternatives were discussed during the analysis process, but were eliminated from further evaluations. The relocation of railroad tracks to the east side of the existing easement to allow for the depot and parking lot expansion was considered but ruled out from further evaluation. The maximum the track could be moved to the east, to allow for present railroad operations, would be 10 feet. Any further movement to the east would be infeasible because: 1) it would result in the loss of the house track which is required for train parking, and; 2) it would require a curve adjacent to the bridge, which is unworkable (M. Fretwell, ARRC, pers. comm., August 6, 1999).

Utilizing the park airstrip for the expansion of the depot facilities was ruled out from further analysis. The park airstrip serves as an important base for emergency medical landings and private planes. It will remain open for NPS and general aviation use at existing levels.

Moving the railroad depot to a location outside Denali National Park and Preserve was considered but eliminated from further evaluation. The NPS views the railroad depot as a center for park infrastructure and facilities. It provides an important mode of transportation for thousands of park visitors. Area services and park operations have been scheduled based on ARRC arrival and departure times in Denali. Railroad operations have an historic significance within the park. It was the first modern means of transportation into the park for visitors and maintaining the depot within the park is a park objective.

The potential environmental consequences of the proposed action and alternatives are described in the EA.

The realignment of a segment of the park road and expansion of the railroad depot would cause 5.0 acres of ground disturbance. This includes the loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands, and the loss of taiga spruce vegetative complex, including white and black spruce and spruce hybrids, balsam poplar trees, and various shrubs including willow, alder, and Alaska rose. An additional 3.0 acres of previously disturbed lands would be disturbed by the creation of the temporary loading and off-loading facilities on the east side of the rail tracks. No wetlands would be impacted by the creation of the temporary facilities on the east side of the rail tracks.

Area topography would be altered from the grading, cutting, and filling required to construct the depot facilities and the road segment. Impacts to large mammal movements around the Denali Park Hotel and Alaska Railroad Depot area already exist due to pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and concentrated visitor use. It is unlikely that further expansion of visitor facilities in that area would create additional impacts to large mammal movements. However, wildlife, including small mammals, birds, and moose, would be temporarily displaced from their habitat during construction, and permanently displaced from 5.0 acres of habitat due to the depot expansion and road realignment. No significant cumulative impacts on wildlife habitat or wildlife behavior would be anticipated from adding the proposed action to other regional activities due to the relatively insignificant amount of area affected.

Dust would be generated from the construction activities, creating a minor, short-term impact to air quality.

There are three recorded cultural sites located within or nearby the project site. It is probable that at least one of these sites would be impacted from the road relocation. The realignment of a segment of the park road would impact a small cultural site classified as a pit and can burn (SI91-1). Appropriate steps would be taken according to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in 36 CFR 800, in consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Native American groups, and any other interested parties. A determination of eligibility would be prepared and an assessment of effect would be completed. Monitoring would occur on site to ensure the adjacent sites are not impacted. If previously unrecorded or unknown sites are found during construction, work would be halted and a cultural resource specialist would be consulted.

Noise from the construction would create short-term, temporary disturbances to wildlife and area visitors. Construction activities would impede pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the depot and hotel areas. In the long-term, the expansion of the railroad depot would have a positive impact on the visitor experience. The depot area would have improved visitor facilities, improved and safer vehicular and pedestrian access, and would be more visually aesthetic. Travel to the park by railway is expected to increase, and may translate into an overall increase in tourist dollars to the local business communities.

The NPS concludes that there is no practicable alternative to selecting alternative 3, expanding the railroad depot facilities and constructing a new 1,800-foot-long segment of the Denali Park Road, at the proposed location. Neither alternative 1 or 2 would meet the objectives of the Entrance Area and Road Corridor DCP/EIS. Alternative 4 would meet the goals of the DCP/EIS, but would impact a greater area of wetlands. The project will be designed to avoid as much wetland area as possible.

As required by NPS wetland protection procedures, impacts on the 1.1 acres of palustrine wetlands will be compensated for, on a minimum 1-for-1 acreage basis, by restoring riverine and palustrine wetland habitat and associated riparian habitat, in the Kantishna Hills region of the park (formerly placer-mined stream and riparian habitat). The NPS therefore finds the proposal to be consistent with Executive Order 11990 and the NPS no-net-loss wetlands policy.

Section 404 Permit Summary

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, and Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, have been considered in this environmental assessment. The proposed action would have no affect on floodplains. A 1.1-acre area of wetlands would be impacted by the proposed action. A permit to address the requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977 will be needed from the Compliance Section, Regulatory Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District prior to project initiation.

Section 4(f) Evaluation

Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966,declares that, "it is the policy of the United States government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation land, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites." Section 4(f) specifies that, "the Secretary [of Transportation] may approve a transportation program or project…requiring the use of publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local significance only if: (1) There is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that land; and (2) The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from the use."

The use of a Section 4(f) resource occurs either when: (1) land from a Section 4(f) site is permanently acquired for a transportation project, (2) when temporary occupancy has adverse effects, or (3) when proximity impacts of the project on the Section 4(f) site are so great that the purposes for which the Section 4(f) site exists are substantially impaired.

Section 4(f) is applicable to historic sites and archeological resources when the resource is included on, or eligible for, the National Register of Historic Places (23 CFR 771.135[e]). Section 4(f) does not apply to archeological sites where it is determined, after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, that the resource is important chiefly because what can be learned by data recovery and has minimal value for preservation in place.

Because the expansion of the railroad depot parking lots and access roads would use Section 4(f) lands, this evaluation identifies significant Section 4(f) resources in the project area, describes the nature and extent of use of these significant properties, and evaluates alternatives that would avoid the use of Section 4(f) resources, in part or altogether.

The Alaska Railroad (ARRC) links Denali National Park and Preserve with Anchorage, Fairbanks, and the ports of Whittier and Seward. In 1995, over 128,000 visitors arrived in Denali on the Alaska Railroad. The current train station location and design creates parking problems, traffic congestion, and safety hazards. It does not adequately serve park visitor needs.

The purpose and need for the project is discussed in the environmental assessment, as are detailed descriptions of the proposed alternatives. These discussions are incorporated herein by reference. In addition, this Section 4(f) evaluation includes a discussion of the alternatives developed to avoid or minimize impacts on the Section 4(f) resources in the depot expansion and road realignment alternatives.

The primary objectives of the proposed project are to:

• Expand the existing railroad depot facility so it meets visitor needs.
• Expand the amount of available parking.
• Provide for pedestrian safety within and around the depot area.
• Decrease traffic congestion and provide safe entrance and exit for vehicular traffic and improved traffic circulation.
• Provide park information to visitors.
• Provide visual separation between road track and bus area.

Project alternatives are described in detail and analyzed in the environmental assessment. Of the alternatives evaluated in the environmental assessment, all alternatives except the no action alternative result in the use of Section 4(f) lands. These alternatives include: expansion of the ARRC facilities outside its existing easement with no road realignment; expansion of the ARRC facilities with the realignment of an 1,800-foot-long segment of the Denali Park Road 200 feet west of its current location; and, expansion of the ARRC facilities outside its existing easement with realignment of the park road at the existing Park Hotel access road site. While the realignment of the existing park road does not constitute a section 4(f) action, the expansion of the depot parking facilities outside the existing easement does.

The relocation of railroad tracks to the east side of the existing easement to allow for the depot and parking lot expansion was considered but ruled out from further evaluation. The maximum the track could be moved to the east, to allow for present railroad operations, would be 10 feet. Any further movement to the east would be infeasible because: 1) it would result in the loss of the house track which is required for train parking, and; 2) it would require a curve adjacent to the bridge, which is unworkable (M. Fretwell, ARRC, pers. comm., August 5, 1999).

Utilizing the park airstrip for the expansion of the depot facilities was ruled out from further analysis. The park airstrip serves as an important base for emergency medical landings and private planes. It will remain open for NPS and general aviation use at existing levels.

Moving the railroad depot to a location outside Denali National Park and Preserve was considered but eliminated from further evaluation. The NPS views the railroad depot as a center for park infrastructure and facilities. It provides an important mode of transportation for thousands of park visitors. Area services and park operations have been scheduled based on ARRC arrival and departure times in Denali. Railroad operations have an historic significance within the park. It was the first modern means of transportation into the park for visitors and maintaining the depot within the park is a park objective

The Section 4(f) property involved with this proposal is Denali National Park and Preserve. Denali National Park and Preserve encompasses more than 6 million acres of Federal land and is managed by the National Park Service. In 1917,Congress established Mount McKinley National Park to "set apart as a public park for the benefit and enjoyment of the people…for recreation purposes by the public and for the preservation of animals